Mediaboss Marketing

By Everard Meade & Mary Meg McCarthy5:55 p.m.Sept. 4, 2014

Sensible, bipartisan immigration reform isnt dead. But if we dont get back to basic constitutional principles, it will drown in cultural politics.

Throughout the Cold War, federal judges of all different stripes blasted the summary and/or arbitrary detention and deportation of noncitizens. They accused the government of trampling the Constitution. Many cited the battle for hearts and minds and the reign of arbitrary imprisonment behind the Iron Curtain.

With less chest-thumping, the federal courts have continued to issue blistering rebukes of U.S. immigration courts and law enforcement, calling upon them to mind the process and the facts of a particular case, not its presumed policy implications.

But the vast majority of immigration claims in the United States are not reviewed by the federal courts. They are litigated and decided entirely within the executive branch, and they are subject to very little public or judicial scrutiny.

Immigrants do not have a right to court-appointed counsel. They are often detained in remote jails, far from family, social, and legal support. If they win relief, the government can appeal, and the attorney general can overrule the Board of Immigration Appeals.

The immigration court system is totally overwhelmed. The current backlog stands at 375,000 cases. This translates into waits of five or more years for a hearing, and a bureaucracy in which many individuals simply get lost.

We spend $18 billion per year on immigration enforcement, but only $360 million on the adjudicatory system. Only 263 immigration judges serve our nation of immigrants.

Casual observers assume that immigration status is more or less obvious. They imagine a person captured by the Border Patrol while sneaking through the desert and wonder why they need much of a hearing.

People in these situations are summarily returned every day. But, in most cases, the circumstances are more complex.

The rest is here:
Fairness should be focus of bipartisan immigration reform

For the past three weeks, police have been using a municipal code -- which bars people from aggressively pursuing others -- to keep abortion clinics in The City secure in the face of aggressive anti-abortion protesters, according to Police Chief Greg Suhr.

This effort, which is a stop-gap measure awaiting legislation in the works that will permanently deal with the issue, follows a June U.S. Supreme Court ruling that barred buffer zones -- such zones existed in San Francisco -- around such facilities.

In June, the Supreme Court struck down a Massachusetts law mandating a 35-foot security buffer around abortion clinics. The ruling in McCullen v. Coakley bars such buffers nationwide because it infringes on First Amendment rights.

But Wednesday night, Suhr told the Police Commission that the department has been enforcing a city code in order to keep clinics safe from aggressive protesters. Thus far, he noted, no one has been cited or arrested.

Suhr also mentioned legislation in the works that would allow police to move protesters away from a clinic for a time and then allow them to return. The idea, he added, would be to make sure abortion clinics are safe, can serve clients and that people's First Amendment rights are upheld.

"We have been working on legislation for the last few months in response to the Supreme Court ruling," Supervisor David Campos said. Those efforts, Campos said, have included Planned Parenthood, the Police Department and the City Attorney's Office.

Campos' legislation would be an anti-harassment ordinance preventing the "kind of harassment that we are seeing ... where people are being followed," he said. A similar law in Massachusetts is being used as a model.

"We will be introducing something very shortly," he said, adding that he would be glad to work with anyone on these efforts. To that end, Campos met with the Mayor's Office on Thursday to inform it for the first time of his legislation.

"The mayor and Supervisor Malia Cohen are working with the City Attorney's Office to craft legislation and it will be introduced in a few weeks," said Christine Falvey, a spokeswoman for Mayor Ed Lee. "The mayor wants to make sure that women and families in San Francisco are not denied access to family planning and reproductive health services."

The Mayor's Office said it was working on separate legislation since late July, although it is almost identical to Campos'.

View original post here:
SFPD keeps abortion clinics safe and gives First Amendment rights to protesters

Hillary Clinton #39;s `Hard Choices
July 18: In this excerpt, part two of Charlie Rose #39;s conversation with Hillary Rodham Clinton. Her book is called "Hard Choices." It is the story of her time...

By: Bloomberg News

More:
Hillary Clinton's `Hard Choices - Video

Blake Clark Give The Bitch A Chance On Presidency
We asked Blake Clark, actor on a TON of Adam Sandler movies, if he thinks Hillary Clinton is a good candidate for Presidency. He answers with what he think should be her campaign slogan!

By: TMZ

Read more:
Blake Clark Give The Bitch A Chance On Presidency - Video

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton speaks at the National Clean Energy Summit 7.0 at the Mandalay Bay Convention Center on Sept. 4, 2014, in Las Vegas. Ethan Miller, Getty Images

Last Updated Sep 4, 2014 9:45 PM EDT

Hillary Clinton predicted Thursday the United States will become the leading 21st century "superpower" in clean energy if the nation confronts the "most consequential, urgent, sweeping collection of challenges we face."

"We shouldn't have to state the obvious ... the data is unforgiving" in demonstrating that climate change and environmental crises are at hand, Clinton said at the National Clean Energy Summit in Las Vegas.

Waving off a passionate sector of Americans who believe otherwise, she cited melting ice caps and the discovery of "carbon dioxide in our atmosphere not seen in millions of years" as evidence of potentially disastrous climate change.

"The threat is real - but so is the opportunity," Clinton said.

"If we come together to make the hard choices, the smart investment in infrastructure, technology and environmental protection, America can be the clean energy superpower for the 21st century," she added.

The speech, which yielded little news but drew impressive audience numbers and hefty national media coverage, was a safe bet for Clinton on all fronts. It offered the 2016 Democratic presidential early frontrunner a chance to plug her book, "Hard Choices," her work as secretary of state and the Clinton Global Initiative. She was also squarely among friends.

Clinton was introduced by her longtime cohort and former colleague, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., who largely orchestrated the event. And she concluded her remarks with a Q&A moderated by longtime family adviser John Podesta, who's rumored to top a shortlist of contenders to chair her White House campaign should she mount one.

Coincidentally, though, the summit's timing pitted Clinton in something of an unplanned head-to-head against a potential 2016 Republican rival. Just 24 hours earlier, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie delivered before a crowd in Mexico City a strongly conservative approach for how to seize on "the North American energy renaissance."

Read more:
Hillary Clinton urges U.S. to become clean energy "superpower"